Association Summit

Readers of The Shiloh Insider will recall that there has been some tension in the relationship between the Ohio Conference and its five Associations. The ground of the tension is certainly important for the local churches of the Ohio Conference.

 

You may remember that a proposal of the Conference Board of Directors was to take control of staffing configurations and OCWM giving that had previously been under the control of each of the five Associations. The move would "save" over $500,000 per year, and is sold as being more responsible stewardship.

 

Instead of arguing the points of the proposal, let me just say that four out of the five Associations have officially rejected the Conference Board's proposal as the course that each Associations finds most favorable for Ohio UCC churches. In order to air the concerns of the Associations, and in order to begin the work of drafting an alternative joint proposal, a summit meeting of leadership from each of the five Ohio Associations was held this past weekend.

 

The discussion was initiated by the Southwest Ohio Northern Kentucky Association. The summit meeting took place on Saturday, May 25,  in Mansfield. We were hosted by St. John's UCC. The hospitality, the food, and the kindness of the staff and volunteers was much appreciated.

 

As Church meetings go, the summit meeting of the Ohio Association leadership contained a wealth of "Whereas" but absolutely no "Therefore." There was consensus on many issues. Most agreed, for instance, that the process of making and communicating this proposal was extremely poor. The methodology failed to include conversation with Associations and local churches. It was a top-down, hub-and-spoke process. It was divisive and exclusionary. It was arrogant and authoritative.

 

Most also agreed that a centralization of control of staffing and OCWM dollars seemed contrary to the basic polity of the United Church of Christ, where the primary unit of ministry and mission rests with the local setting. Most thought that the proposal was isolating to congregations and authorized ministries and ministers. Local support would have to be sought from a centralized Conference instead of a more regional Association.

 

There was additional consensus, though it must be said that one of the Associations, Central Southeast, seemed more supportive of the proposal than did the other represented Associations.

 

Another summit meeting of Association leadership is scheduled for Thursday, April 20, at which time, we might hope, the summit is led to configure some "Therefore." What concrete proposal might the Associations recommend to remain faithful to God's calling and, at the same time, be more responsible with OCWM dollars? Can we reduce redundancy and come out of a process of structural renewal that better serves the church in the local setting?

 

Stay tuned for more information.